5punk

I think that my next upgrade is likely to be a monitor, because having an 8800GTS is likely to make up for the shortcomings of my other components for now, and I'm a little fed up with my current 17" CRT. Now I've been offered a 19" CRT for £30ish by our resident Dr, but I'll not be able to pick it up until early September, and I was thinking is it worth getting a LCD monitor instead?

Euyer have this one and this one available, which are at the top end of what I'd consider spending, but is it worth it over a 19" CRT? Space isn't really an issue cos I have a huge desk, but I know nothing about LCD monitors, and was always under the uninformed impression that without spending silly money on a flat-screen, CRTs actually have better displays. Am I wrong?

LCDs are usually bigger inch for inch (as monitors are measured in size including any casing etc)

Better or not is quite subjective, but LCDs are flat*, usually far sharper, and put out less heat.

*flat CRTs usually have very deep glass on the front, can be weird and not flat feeling

O RLY? I always thought it excluded casing! A LCD monitor would be about a foot further away then my current one from where I sit, so might look a bit better than when right up close, but given my lack of botheredness either way I reckon cheaper might be better. Just thought I'd put it out there (fnar fnar) and see if there were any compelling arguments either way.

And Chicken - big LCDs being more expensive than second hand CRTs is not a compelling argument for LCDs.

Lateralus wrote:O RLY? I always thought it excluded casing!

I'm not *certain* but ISTR that (in the past at least) that TVs were measured in viewable, monitors in how much space they eat.

It's the same measurements for CRT and Flat panels regardless of casing, measured corner to corner

Which is why with a widescreen 20" you'll get slightly less area than a 20" square.

Just had a look at the monitor I'll probably get off Berk, and the site said Size: 19", Viewable: 18".

http://www.pcmech.com/show/monitors/116/ probably covers the monitor size thing.

.

i loved my old CRT, 21" (20.5" viewable) just a pity about the size / weight. Got a 20" wide screen TFT and i don't think i would go back to CRT ever again. I think the image on a TFT always looks sharper.

Lat, with a 8800 and a 17" crt you will probably have a dvi connector and a vga adaptor for the cable/monitor, if you can get a monitor that is dvi, your picture quality will improve. Neither of them have dvi connectors.

Edit- on ebuyer, the selection of monitors has dropped drastically, all the best ones have been bought, it might be best for you to wait until a few more are back in stock. this philips is the cheapest tft with dvi as far as I can tell.

HereComesPete wrote:Lat, with a 8800 and a 17" crt you will probably have a dvi connector and a vga adaptor for the cable/monitor, if you can get a monitor that is dvi, your picture quality will improve. Neither of them have dvi connectors.

Edit- on ebuyer, the selection of monitors has dropped drastically, all the best ones have been bought, it might be best for you to wait until a few more are back in stock. this philips is the cheapest tft with dvi as far as I can tell.

Since when have CRT's used DVI input? Can't say I've ever found one that does, although I could be wrong.

The card will be dvi, so to fit a crt cable to it, Im guesing lat will have used an adaptor on the card end of the cable. Although to be fair, my post does make it sound like t'other end of the cable is what I'm talking about.

the CRT size thing - they are normally measured by the size of the tube, ie somewhere inside the bezel.
Anywhooo, I wouldn't bother with a CRT.
TFTs are better in so many ways, and the slow response time of the early ones is really no longer a problem. Most seem to be 8-12ms now, which pretty much eliminate the issue.
Why would you think about CRT nowadays?

I'll confess, the only reason why I'm still on CRT myself is because:

1) I've got essentially 2 desks and a desk level shelf, so loads of room.

2) Most LCD's are locked on refresh and resolution. I'm not spending £600ish on a top of the line to do what my free currently working (couple of lol moments occasionally, like going blue/red on a very hot day) crt can do.

3) Due to a bungled RMA a couple of years ago, I have a brand new working spare

buzzmong wrote:Since when have CRT's used DVI input? Can't say I've ever found one that does, although I could be wrong.

You are wrong. The Iiyama Vision Master Pro 453, for instance, has DVI input. The Iiyama 45x monitors were great, but I still wouldn't go back to CRT.

My current monitor cost me the equivalent of just under £120 (almost a year ago) - a lot less than my Vision Master Pro 451s cost back in the day. It's a reasonable size and resolution (20"/1400x1050), decent colour reproduction, and 8ms refresh. You certainly don't have to spend anything like £600 to get a very usable flat panel monitor.

I used to see no need for LCDs as I had an unlimited supply of 17" CRTs from work's surplus, but I wanted widescreen on the new box.

Close colours are far more distinct on LCDs, and the response times and blurring I hated from the early ones are long gone.

Also even the cheap ones are now okay quality-wise. I have a £200 Asus 16:10 22" sat next to a £100 Acer 4:3 19", and with a much narrower bezel than CRTs, that gives me 2960x1050 of screen for 300 notes.